Early 'verdict' on redistricting

Trial shows the intent of Florida voters was undermined

State Sen. John Thrasher, R-St. Augustine, examines a Florida Senate
redistricting map in March 2012 during a meeting of the Senate Redistricting
Committee in Tallahassee. A lawsuit filed by the League of Women Voters and other groups contends that the Legislature’s process for redrawing Florida’s congressional districts violated provisions of the state constitution.

AP FILE PHOTO

Published: Sunday, June 8, 2014 at 1:00 a.m.

Last Modified: Friday, June 6, 2014 at 5:32 p.m.

In November 2010, 63 percent of Florida voters approved constitutional amendments designed to make the state's congressional and legislative districts more fair.

The amendments state, in part, that no district should be drawn "with the intent to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbent."

But, as demonstrated in a recent trial in which Florida's congressional redistricting process was challenged, partisanship continues to trump public interest.

As reported by the Miami Herald, among the revelations in the 13-day trial in Tallahassee's circuit court were:

"A map was filed under a fraudulent name and no one is investigating. Legislators testified they routinely deleted redistricting records. A legislative staffer admitted giving a flash drive of maps to a GOP political operative two weeks before they became public. Phone records of a House speaker and his right hand man, sought for more than a year, were never produced. And legislative leaders acknowledged they met secretly with their staff and political operatives to discuss strategy."

Whether the evidence is enough to bring about a redrawing of Florida's 2012 congressional map will be up to Circuit Judge Terry Lewis, whose decision is expected by the end of June. That decision, which will almost certainly be appealed, is unlikely to affect this year's elections but could impact the 2016 elections and beyond.

Re-examine the process

Yet, whatever the outcome, the trial makes clear that the voters' intent -- to create a redistricting process free of political favoritism -- has not been honored. The evidence should prompt a re-examination of redistricting to see what can be done to further remove partisanship from the equation.

Of course, congressional and legislative redistricting -- required every 10 years as a result of the federal census -- has always been political. The party in power -- whether Democratic or Republican, in Florida and in other states -- has manipulated the process to try to preserve its advantage.

Florida's 2012 district maps, in fact, were much improved over the previous versions -- thanks to the constitutional amendments. As a result, the 2012 races were more competitive than in past years, and Democrats picked up seats in both Congress and the Legislature.

Republicans kept strong majorities in the Florida House and Senate and the congressional delegation, but Democrats deserve some of the blame for failing to field more and better candidates. Senate President Don Gaetz points out that while the GOP has a 26-14 advantage in his chamber, Democrats lost races in five districts in which they held an edge in voter registration.

The process is further complicated as both federal law and the state amendments forbid the drawing of districts that diminish the chances of minority representation.

Justice Pariente's proposals

Still, in a state where Democrats have a slight edge in voter registration, Republicans hold a 17-10 advantage in the congressional delegation.

That fact, along with the creation of the long, twisting district for U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Jacksonville -- which just happens to make surrounding districts safer for Republicans -- and the political machinations described above, led the League of Women Voters and other groups to sue the Legislature. The suit claims the congressional redistricting map violates provisions of the 2010 Fair District amendments.

While we await Judge Lewis' decision, it's not too soon to consider how the redistricting process could be improved.

Among them was her suggestion that the standard of "intent" be removed from the governing law, perhaps replaced with a reference to outcomes such as competitive districts. It's hard for a court to determine the political intent of the Legislature, she noted, and few other states use such a standard.

Pariente also recommended that Florida "seriously examine the adoption of an independent apportionment commission," similar to those used in other states, both Republican- and Democratic-controlled.

But with the high stakes involved -- the representation of voters in both Congress and the Legislature -- just being better is not good enough. Justice Pariente provided a guide for Floridians as they continue to strive for fair districts and fair elections.

<p>In November 2010, 63 percent of Florida voters approved constitutional amendments designed to make the state's congressional and legislative districts more fair.</p><p>The amendments state, in part, that no district should be drawn "with the intent to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbent."</p><p>But, as demonstrated in a recent trial in which Florida's congressional redistricting process was challenged, partisanship continues to trump public interest.</p><p>As reported by the Miami Herald, among the revelations in the 13-day trial in Tallahassee's circuit court were:</p><p>"A map was filed under a fraudulent name and no one is investigating. Legislators testified they routinely deleted redistricting records. A legislative staffer admitted giving a flash drive of maps to a GOP political operative two weeks before they became public. Phone records of a House speaker and his right hand man, sought for more than a year, were never produced. And legislative leaders acknowledged they met secretly with their staff and political operatives to discuss strategy."</p><p>Whether the evidence is enough to bring about a redrawing of Florida's 2012 congressional map will be up to Circuit Judge Terry Lewis, whose decision is expected by the end of June. That decision, which will almost certainly be appealed, is unlikely to affect this year's elections but could impact the 2016 elections and beyond.</p><p>Re-examine the process</p><p>Yet, whatever the outcome, the trial makes clear that the voters' intent -- to create a redistricting process free of political favoritism -- has not been honored. The evidence should prompt a re-examination of redistricting to see what can be done to further remove partisanship from the equation.</p><p>Of course, congressional and legislative redistricting -- required every 10 years as a result of the federal census -- has always been political. The party in power -- whether Democratic or Republican, in Florida and in other states -- has manipulated the process to try to preserve its advantage.</p><p>Florida's 2012 district maps, in fact, were much improved over the previous versions -- thanks to the constitutional amendments. As a result, the 2012 races were more competitive than in past years, and Democrats picked up seats in both Congress and the Legislature.</p><p>Republicans kept strong majorities in the Florida House and Senate and the congressional delegation, but Democrats deserve some of the blame for failing to field more and better candidates. Senate President Don Gaetz points out that while the GOP has a 26-14 advantage in his chamber, Democrats lost races in five districts in which they held an edge in voter registration.</p><p>The process is further complicated as both federal law and the state amendments forbid the drawing of districts that diminish the chances of minority representation.</p><p>Justice Pariente's proposals</p><p>Still, in a state where Democrats have a slight edge in voter registration, Republicans hold a 17-10 advantage in the congressional delegation.</p><p>That fact, along with the creation of the long, twisting district for U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Jacksonville -- which just happens to make surrounding districts safer for Republicans -- and the political machinations described above, led the League of Women Voters and other groups to sue the Legislature. The suit claims the congressional redistricting map violates provisions of the 2010 Fair District amendments.</p><p>While we await Judge Lewis' decision, it's not too soon to consider how the redistricting process could be improved.</p><p>Florida Supreme Court Justice Barbara Pariente, in a May 2012 opinion concurring with a court decision affirming the Florida Senate redistricting plan, proposed several ideas worth pursuing.</p><p>Among them was her suggestion that the standard of "intent" be removed from the governing law, perhaps replaced with a reference to outcomes such as competitive districts. It's hard for a court to determine the political intent of the Legislature, she noted, and few other states use such a standard.</p><p>Pariente also recommended that Florida "seriously examine the adoption of an independent apportionment commission," similar to those used in other states, both Republican- and Democratic-controlled.</p><p>Undoubtedly, the Fair District amendments improved Florida's redistricting process.</p><p>But with the high stakes involved -- the representation of voters in both Congress and the Legislature -- just being better is not good enough. Justice Pariente provided a guide for Floridians as they continue to strive for fair districts and fair elections.</p>